Creating A MovementAn Animal Rights Article from All-Creatures.org

FROM

Below is a blog I posted at the
Vegans of Color
blog - with their permission I have re-posted it below. To understand the first
half of my blog - do check out
Vegans of Color.

Not even sure where to start except to thank Johanna for creating such an
important forum.

Like Breeze (A. Breeze Harper, author of
Sistah Vegan), I am glad that VegNews took the opportunity to allow their
readers to see the vegan movement from a different perspective (June 2010, “We
the People” by Michael Parrish). I have been involved in the animal rights
movement for over 20 years, and that involvement has been about justice –
fighting for it and wanting to fight oppression in whatever form it takes. This
extends to both humans and animals. In the past, using my forum to speak about
injustices against people caused me grief from some in the animal rights
movement, which is why I started the Food Empowerment Project: so I could talk
about both. (Just for the ease of reading, I will use “human” to refer to human
animals and “animals” when referring to non-human animals.)

One part of the VegNews article that intrigued me was the idea that it was
surprising that vegans of color exist – as if we are hard to find. As a woman of
color who has run two non-profits, I know that the grassroots is full of people
of color.

Right now, a huge issue that's on my mind, as it is for many people of color,
is the law that recently passed in Arizona. I am sure many of you can understand
that there are no words of disgust, sadness and outrage that can be expressed
with mere words on a computer. I studied the civil rights movement and have
devoured countless books about racism and the painful struggle for justice, and
yet I am still in a bit of shock.

I have been speaking for a few years now at animal rights conferences about how
racism is alive and well in this country, and the law in Arizona and the
treatment of our President make this crystal clear.

But where does the animal rights movement fit into this? Animal rights
organizations typically make decisions that focus solely on the animals, as most
would expect, but occasionally those decisions have repercussions that offend
those who are our natural allies. For example, a few years ago a very important
initiative, sponsored by organizations that work for animals, was passed by
voters in Arizona to ensure that pregnant pigs and male calves raised for veal
had the ability to turn around and stretch their limbs.

I bring up this initiative because one of the key supporters – who was recruited
by the organizations that sponsored the initiative, and who did television
commercials for it – was Sheriff Joe Arpaio. When I learned this, I expressed my
concern and disgust and commented, at that time, that if there had been one
person of color in that room there was no way that person would have been okay
with Sheriff Arpaio. In case you haven't heard of the notorious Sheriff Joe, he
is credited with laying the groundwork for the current law.

These organizations stated over and over again how popular Arpaio was and how
he helped the campaign, and they continued to defend their use of him (with some
mocking of those who were opposed to this) even after the campaign had been won.

But my question then and now is the same: at what cost? Malcolm X is known for
the phrase by any means necessary, but I do not believe he meant that we should
sell our values, our principles, our sense of decency, or that we should seek to
make progress at the expense of other victims of abusive systems.

This type of thinking only hurts us and the animals in the end. If we are a
movement that speaks out about the injustice that takes place against animals
but ignore injustices against humans, that just plays in to the hands of our
opposition and fosters the lies they tell about us. It also weakens us, as we no
longer show ourselves to be a compassionate movement. And again, I am not saying
that the animal movement should take on other causes as we have billions of
animals to speak out for; however, we need to be consistent in our sense of
justice.

Isn’t it possible that the initiative would have still passed without Sheriff
Joe? We won’t know, but we do know that aligning ourselves with someone like him
should never happen again.

I was allowed to be a part of the endorsement process when the initiative
came to California and ended up opening more doors of communication between
animal, labor and environmental justice groups.

That is why I love the slogan of this forum: “Because we can’t afford to be
single-issued.” And honestly, that sums it up for me. I can’t be afford to be,
we can’t be afford to be. And while animal groups must focus on animal issues
(to abide by their mission statements) I truly hope that they can reach out to
us and respect us enough to listen to our concerns and take us seriously.

Trust me, I think animal groups need to work primarily on animal issues, as
that is their role and the animals need them—and for them to work on other
issues that tie in may not always result in a sincere effort. But it is vital
for them to work with groups and individuals who don’t look at these as
single-issues in order to avoid alienating people.

As many people have heard me say before, Martin Luther King, Jr. became most
dangerous to the system when he started to embrace other movements (anti-war and
the plight of janitors) and went beyond the civil rights movement. We, too, will
be more of a force the sooner we embrace those the system works to divide and
conquer. We can’t allow them to do this to us—we can’t afford it and neither can
the animals.

From the perspective of some environmental justice groups in Arizona, animal
groups gave the impression that they cared more about animals than humans, and
in some ways I know there are those who feel that way; however, our movement
will never grow if we continue to turn our backs on people who suffer
injustices, as they also deserve to be treated with respect, dignity and
compassion.

Fair Use Notice: This document, and others on our web site, may contain copyrighted
material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owners.
We believe that this not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use
of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use,
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.